<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<head>
    <title>Sir Mustapha's Reviews: The NEU! ratings</title>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
    <meta name="Author" content="Fernando H. Canto" />
    <meta name="Keywords" content="reviews, albums, music, Fernie Canto, Sir Mustapha, Fernando Canto" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" title="Classic Blue" href="code/classic.css" />
    <link rel="alternate stylesheet" title="Plainish" href="code/plain.css" />
</head>

<body>

<h1>
    The NEU! album ratings!
</h1>

<p>When I started the website, I had a very simple, clean rating system: it ranged from 0 to 10, in steps of 0.5. It sounded fair enough to me; after all, 10 is a nice, round number, and the half steps gave me a good number of possible ratings to keep my "ranking" of albums very clear and accurate. I even reserved a special rating of 11 to albums I considered extraodinarily great (two of them, to be exact). But the problem was... I ended up not understanding my own rating system. I don't know what happened, but it did. The range from 0 to 10 looked unbalanced, somehow, and the overall "ranking" didn't look quite the way I once imagined. Something had happened.</p>

<p>And for some time, I felt it was time to change the system, <em>somehow</em>. Maybe re-rate the albums. But by that time, I figured out I didn't like the 0..10 rating anymore. So, what to do? The solution came when I remembered reading, some time ago, a webpage about a new numbering system developed by (?!?). In his page, he shows how the base 10 numbering system we use is inadequate and odd, and proposed a base 16 numbering system he dubbed "Bioctal" (because Hexadecimal is contradictory). And then, I realised 16 was a pretty good number for a music reviews website like mine. So I adopted his 'glyphs' and created the NEU! album ratings - obviously in honour of German band NEU!, whose name stands for "NEW!". Basically, the ratings now range from 0 to 15 (but not in decimal numbers!), in steps of 1, with the reserved rating of 16 for the "extraordinarily great" albums. I think it works better, now. It loos more balanced to me, and now, this is my new ratings system. Below are the ratings and a brief explanation on them:</p>

<h2>[16] - The Top of the League</h2>

<p>Previously known as the "11". These are only two albums, but they are my favourite two albums <em>ever</em>, for a number of reasons.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="oldfield.htm#amarok">Amarok</a>, Mike Oldfield</li>
  <li><a href="floyd.htm#moon">Dark Side Of The Moon</a>, Pink Floyd</li>
</ol>

<h2>[15] - The Best</h2>

<p>The limitation here is that only one album per artist is allowed the 15, to determine the album I consider their best. Sometimes the difference between a 15 and a 14 is mostly symbolic, but it's always significative. Note that doesn't mean <em>every</em> artist must have a 15-worthy album.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#road">Abbey Road</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="builder.htm#album">Bob The Builder: The Album</a>, Bob The Builder</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#equinoxe">Equinoxe</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#exodus">Exodus</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="neu.htm#neu75">NEU! 75</a>, NEU!</li>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#express">Trans Europe Express</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
</ol>

<h2>[14] - Superb</h2>

<p>Virtually <em>ideal</em> albums. These ones deserve a special place in the history of music.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#world">Computer World</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#dread">Natty Dread</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#oxygene">Oxyg&egrave;ne</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="faust.htm#far">So Far</a>, Faust</li>
</ol>

<h2>[13] - Excellent</h2>

<p>These albums are not as "important" as the ones above, but also deserve much praise. They have that <em>something</em>, you know?</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#autobahn">Autobahn</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#fire">Catch A Fire</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="cranberries.htm#we">Everybody Else Is Doing It, So Why Can't We?</a>, The Cranberries</li>
  <li><a href="faust.htm#faust">Faust</a>, Faust</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#magnetiques">Les Chants Magn&egrave;tiques</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#revolver">Revolver</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#soul">Rubber Soul</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#machine">The Man Machine</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
</ol>

<h2>[12] - Great</h2>

<p>This is <em>TEH STUFF</em>, you know. Damn good albums, and probably deserve to be bought by you. Get them if you find them.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#night">A Hard Day's Night</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#burnin">Burnin'</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#confrontation">Confrontation</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#kaya">Kaya</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#tour">Magical Mystery Tour</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="neu.htm#neu">NEU!</a>, NEU!</li>
  <li><a href="cranberries.htm#argue">No Need To Argue</a>, The Cranberries</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#oxygene7-13">Oxyg&egrave;ne 7-13</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#masters2">Past Masters, Vol 2</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#aktivitat">Radio-Aktivit&auml;t</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#vous">Rendez-Vous</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#band">Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="faust.htm#tapes">The Faust Tapes</a>, Faust</li>
</ol>

<h2>[11] - Very Good</h2>

<p>Well, these albums probably lack that <em>something</em>, but they still have a lot of stuff to offer. Something stops them from entering the "high places," whatever that something is.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="cranberries.htm#hatchet">Bury The Hatchet</a>, The Cranberries</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#chronologie">Chronologie</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#cousteau">En Attendant Cousteau</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="faust.htm#iv">Faust IV</a>, Faust</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#love">Geometry Of Love</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#help">Help!</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#be">Let It Be</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#metamorphoses">Metamorphoses</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="neu.htm#neu2">NEU! 2</a>, NEU!</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#masters1">Past Masters, Vol 1</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#florian">Ralf Und Florian</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#vibration">Rastaman Vibration</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#thebeatles">The Beatles</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#soundtracks">Tour De France Soundtracks</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#uprising">Uprising</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#zoolook">Zoolook</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
</ol>

<h2>[10] - Good</h2>

<p>Albums no one should be ashamed of having. These are always positive points in my collection, things that I'm still fond of after quite some time.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#sale">Beatles For Sale</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#revolutions">Revolutions</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
  <li><a href="marley.htm#survival">Survival</a>, Bob Marley</li>
  <li><a href="cranberries.htm#coffee">Wake Up And Smell The Coffee</a>, The Cranberries</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#beatles">With The Beatles</a>, The Beatles</li>
</ol>

<h2>[9] - Nice</h2>

<p>Maybe not albums I'd listen to very often, but they left a good impression in my ears... with maybe a couple of questionable spots or not.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#kraftwerk2">Kraftwerk 2</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="beatles.htm#me">Please Please Me</a>, The Beatles</li>
  <li><a href="cranberries.htm#departed">To The Faithful Departed</a>, The Cranberries</li>
</ol>

<h2>[8] - OK</h2>

<p>These albums are <em>just</em> above the line. Not something I regret listening, but nothing I treasure too much.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#kraftwerk">Kraftwerk</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
  <li><a href="jarre.htm#sessions2000">Sessions 2000</a>, Jean Michel Jarre</li>
</ol>

<h2>[7] - Passable</h2>

<p>I refrain from criticising these albums too much, maybe either because they're not "bad," or maybe because they just don't deserve any strong feelings from me.</p>

<ol>
  <li><a href="kraftwerk.htm#cafe">Electric Cafe</a>, Kraftwerk</li>
</ol>

<h2>[6] - Dismissable</h2>

<p>Don't bother with these. These are albums so plain, that they don't even deserve hatred or repeated listenings "just for laffs".</p>

<h2>[5] - Mediocre</h2>

<p>Negative spots on my collection already. They <em>do</em> have serious problems and bad spots, though maybe they contain some goodies, or aren't an offensive listen overall.</p>

<h2>[4] - Bad</h2>

<p>Ah, <em>these</em> ones I dislike. The strong feelings begin to appear, you see?</p>

<h2>[3] - Very Bad</h2>

<p>I start spilling my venom over these albums. Something <em>very</em> wrong happened with these albums. Avoid.</p>

<h2>[2] - Awful</h2>

<p>Goodness! We're reaching the lowest circles of Hell already. Albums given this rating either will corrupt your soul forever, or deserve big laughs.</p>

<h2>[1] - Shit</h2>

<p>Bah, it's not even funny anymore. <em>This</em> is the true nadir - albums that must be burned, banned from planet Earth  for good.</p>

<h2>[0] - ???</h2>

<p>I'll reserve this rating for <em>really</em> special cases. I don't think any album can be this bad accidentally (not even Mike Oldfield playing "Chill out" accompanied by Kenny G... okay, maybe yes), but this rating will still be here for... whatever.</p>

<p>Total of reviewed albums: <big>248</big></p>

<h2 class="artistHeader">An explanation on the ratings system</h2>

<p>Album ratings, in no circumstances, should be considered as absolute, unequivocal measures of how good an album really is. They are merely a device I use for comparing albums, according to my personal tastes. I'm not trying to list the "20 Best Albums Of All Time" or something here. This is <em>not</em> Pitchfork Media or Rolling Stone. Don't take these ratings too seriously: they just represent how these albums are "ordered" inside my head.</p>

<p>The albums are evaluated based on five aspects, based on how I perceive an album:<br />
<big>Fun Factor:</big> It represents how much I can genuinely <em>enjoy</em> an album. It's a totally subjective rating, and there are several reasons why an album can be fun or not.<br />
<big>Resonance:</big> Another subjective rating, it relates to the emotional response an album causes on me: sadness, joy, excitement, peace, anger, or anything else. It an album causes true emotions on me, this rating will be high.<br />
<big>Originality:</big> A slightly more objective rating, now. This one tells whether an album is truly unique and creeative, or at least if its ideas are fresh and new. I have no much use for albums that sound exactly the same as others.<br />
<big>Richness:</big> Also slightly more objective, it reflects the <em>amount</em> and <em>quality</em> of the musical ideas in an album. Melodies, themes, riffs, good lyrics, atmospheres: these are what count here.<br />
<big>Solidness:</big> It basically tells if an album truly holds up as a solid unit - consistence, fluidness, tightness. I particularly like albums like that.</p>

<p>That math isn't always 100% perfect for reflecting my true feelings for an album. So, in a few cases, I give out <big>Bonuses</big> for certain albums, in order to increase or decrease the overall rating for some reason or other. Those reasons can be various, and most times, highly personal. The truth is, I give out Bonuses 'cause I can. The five grades are calculated to an average, added to the Bonuses - if there are any - and then rounded up or down into the final rating.</p>

<p>Of course, you are free to <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">mail me</a> any comments you have about my reviews and/or the albums/artists I have reviewed. Anything you may want to add will be accepted, and I generally value the polite, well-thought-out personal opinions over the baseless, mindless flames. I am not afraid of flames, but I don't respect those who don't try to respect me. If you just don't like my reviews, just tell me why and give me a good reason. Flame me, and you will show the whole world what a moron you are. If you just don't like me... hey, chill out, this is only the Internet, innit?</p>

<p>By convention, all album titles are written in <strong>bold</strong>, and song titles are enclosed in 'single quotes'. You are <em>not</em> obliged to follow the same convention when you send your comments, nor are you obliged to adopt my rating system to rate albums. Simply be yourself, and we'll be fine.</p>

<p><a href="index.htm">Back to the Reviews Page index</a></p>

<p>
  <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><img
      src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10"
      alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" height="31" width="88" /></a>
</p>

</body>

</html>